Archived Information

2008 Teaching
American History
Selection Criteria
 Selection Criteria- Allocation
of Points

• Project quality - 45
• Significance – 20
• Quality of the Project Evaluation – 20
• Quality of the Management plan – 15
 Project Quality (45 Points)
(a) The likelihood that the proposed project
will develop, implement, and strengthen
programs to teach traditional American
history as a separate academic subject (not
as a component of social studies) within
elementary school and secondary school
curricula.
 Project Quality
(b) How specific traditional American history
content will be covered by the grant, including:
- the significant issues, episodes, and turning
points in U.S. history
- how the words and deeds of individuals have
determined the course of our Nation
- and how the principles of freedom and
democracy articulated in the founding
documents of this Nation have shaped
America's struggles and achievements and its
social, political, and legal institutions and
relations.
 Project Quality
• The format in which the project will deliver
the history content
• The quality of the staff and consultants
responsible for delivering activities
 Project Quality
(c) How well the applicant describes a plan
that meets the statutory requirement to carry
out activities under the grant in partnership
with one or more of the following:
(i) An institution of higher education.
(ii) A nonprofit history or humanities
organization.
(iii) A library or museum.
 Project Quality
(d) The applicant's rationale for selecting the
partner(s) and its description of specific
activities that the partner(s) will contribute
to the grant during each year of the project.
The applicant should include a
memorandum of understanding or detailed
letters of commitment from the partner(s) in
an appendix to the application narrative.
 Project Quality- Notes
Notes expand on criteria and highlight
areas of importance. It is recommended to
include:
 Actual history subject matter content
 Research base for activities
 Needs assessment of the teachers to be
served
 How project/plan will upgrade teacher
quality in LEA or consortium
 Significance (20 Points)
(a) The extent to which the proposed project
is likely to build local capacity to improve
or expand the LEA’s ability to provide
American history teachers professional
development in traditional American history
subject content and content-related teaching
strategies.
 Significance
(b) The importance or magnitude of the
results or outcomes likely to be attained by
the proposed project, especially
improvements in teaching and student
achievement.
 Significance
(c) How teachers will use the knowledge
acquired from project activities to improve
the quality of instruction. This description
may include plans for reviewing how
teachers’ lesson planning and classroom
teaching are affected by their participation
in project activities.
 Significance- Notes
Notes expand on criteria and highlight
areas of importance. It is recommended to
include:
 How project will build local capacity
 Data on teacher certification
 Student achievement data in U.S. history
 Rates of participation in AP U.S. history
 Quality of the Project
Evaluation (20 Points)
(a) The extent to which the methods of
evaluation include the use of objective
performance measures that are clearly
related to the intended outcomes of the
project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible.
 Quality of the Project
Evaluation
(b) How well the evaluation plans are aligned
with the project design explained under the
Project Quality criterion.

(c) Whether the evaluation includes

benchmarks to monitor progress toward
specific project objectives, and outcome
measures to assess the impact on teaching
and learning or other important outcomes
for project participants.
 Quality of the Project
Evaluation

(d) Whether the applicant identifies the

individual and/or organization that has
agreed to serve as evaluator for the project
and includes a description of the
qualifications of that evaluator.
 Quality of the Project
Evaluation
(e) The extent to which the applicant indicates the
following:
(i) What types of data will be collected.
(ii) When various types of data will be collected.
(iii) What methods will be used to collect data.
(iv) What data collection instruments will be
developed.
(v) How the data will be analyzed.
(vi) When reports of results and outcomes will be
available.
 Quality of the Project
Evaluation
(vii) How the applicant will use the information
collected through the evaluation to monitor the
progress of the funded project and to provide
accountability information both about success at
the initial site and about effective strategies for
replication in other settings.

(viii) How the applicant will devote an appropriate

level of resources to project evaluation.
 Quality of the Project
Evaluation: Notes
Notes expand on criteria and highlight areas
of importance. It is recommended to include:

Response to GPRA performance indicators

(student achievement and teacher content
knowledge)
Collection of output and outcome data
Selection of an independent, objective
evaluator who will be involved in the grant
 Quality of the Management
Plan (15 Points)
(a) The adequacy of the management plan to
achieve the objectives of the proposed
project on time and within budget,
including clearly defined responsibilities,
timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
 Quality of the Management
Plan

(b) The extent to which the time commitments

of the project director and other key project
personnel are appropriate and adequate to
meet the objectives of the proposed project.
 Quality of the Management
Plan
Notes expand on criteria and highlight areas
of importance. It is recommended to:

 Explain role of partners

 Document commitment of partners
 Include a schedule of grant activities